Enough now, that was Tuesday
I think that will do us for today. Thanks for reading throughout Tuesday. Thanks also to Bridie Jabour for the taxing dawn offensive and to the on road team of Lenore Taylor, Gabrielle Chan and Mike Bowers.
Let’s assess the sum of our campaign parts to date.
-
Malcolm Turnbull is bursting with energy, but the government is yet to launch one new policy, digging in behind its budget, either because that’s all there is, we have eight weeks selling a plan that was unveiled in the budget last week, or the stasis is useful while the leader and the campaign operation behind him finds its feet. As they say in the classics, only time will tell.
-
On that score, there are some stirrings in the Liberal party base over the superannuation measures which will either settle or escalate, depending on how the campaign travels. In campaigns, success breeds success, and ill discipline breeds ill discipline.
-
Labor has opened on education, and opened in the regions. Every campaign in recent memory Labor has been hopeful about its prospects in far north Queensland, and the efforts have come to naught. Perhaps this time is different, and courtesy of the long campaign Bill Shorten has time to put the plane on the ground and do some baby kissing and hand pumping. Again, as they say in the classics, only time will tell.
-
I suspect things will be a bit terse behind the scenes in Labor’s campaign headquarters about the sum of the first two days. Shorten was late to position north on day one, so lost some early momentum to Turnbull, who was on the move from first light on the first day. Then the education message has been fighting for oxygen because the government really doesn’t want to talk about education (that’s a lose for the Coalition). It wants to talk about asylum boats, so it’s doing everything in its power to keep Labor in the boats frame. Why? Because the Coalition thinks it wins always on boats, hands down, and if you can push Labor into boats, you can set up the pincer movement. The Coalition can move in from the right and the Greens also crowd in from the left. Double plus good.
-
Neat segue to the Greens. The Greens are playing for keeps this cycle. Raising the spectre of the minority parliament (which was the game plan today) elevates their stakes, they move themselves out of the wings, fighting for airtime, to centre stage. Everyone is suddenly in pursuit of the Greens. And they move there at Labor’s expense. Greens supporters like the idea of a hung parliament because in that matrix, the Greens have influence. Labor supporters hate the notion. It brings back the whole memory of the Rudd/Gillard period, which the party has worked assiduously over the past three years to consign to history. Any day Labor fights in a boats/minority government frame is a clear loss in terms of the national strategy.
But we are only two days in. The campaign stretches out to the sky and then some. We can only wait and watch how the dynamics play out, in my case, minute by minute, all day.
Have a lovely evening. Let’s do it all again in the morning.
The treasurer Scott Morrison is campaigning today in Tasmania. The subject of superannuation comes up.
Q: The Institute of Public Affairs is describing the retrospective elements of your superannuation changes as diabolical and causing an absolute fire storm amongst its members. Some backbenchers are concerned. Would you reconsider?
Scott Morrison:
There’s no retrospectivity in our plan. 97% of superannuants are completely unaffected by the changes we announced on Tuesday night. Our plan for superannuation is to target the most wealthy of our superannuants and ensure that they are paying tax on earnings for capital above $1.6m. You’ve got to be earning more than $250,000 to be impacted by the measures that we announced.
This is just, frankly, a campaign being drummed up by the Labor party because they know that what we’ve put out there is a strong package ...
(And the IPA, which is not exactly the Labor party .. but moving on .. )
Q: So you won’t consider any changes at all?
Scott Morrison:
Our plan is there, it’s clear and ensuring that people on lower incomes can have a more affordable contribution to their superannuation.
(That’s not quite no, is it – our plan is there. The follow up question should have been is your plan there forever?)
A few words on gotcha and election campaigns
I did promise a post on the subject of gotcha and election campaigns, bouncing off this comment from Kelso Kel on my Facebook forum earlier today.
Reading the interview transcript with Shorten and Cathy O’Toole, it makes me so angry and frustrated that she’s being badgered for a gotcha moment on refugee policy. It’s backing people into a corner like that which transforms a policy discussion into high-stakes take-no-prisoners extremism and which doesn’t serve anyone! I’m 100% anti the bipartisan position on asylum seekers but I don’t agree with the way (some) members of the media make a game of policy differences within parties. All that does is shut down debate, shuts down differences of opinion and it trains our electorate to focus on the gotcha instead of the issue.
In case you are only now tuning in to the campaign, and you’ve missed the context for this remark, earlier today Bill Shorten and Labor’s candidate for the seat of Herbert Cathy O’Toole wanted to talk about schools funding, but found themselves peppered with questions about asylum seekers. The reason for this is O’Toole has previously publicly expressed support for a more humane policy when it comes to the treatment of boat arrivals. A picture of O’Toole (helpfully) surfaced today with the candidate holding a #LetThemStay sign.
I stress I don’t know how the picture surfaced because I’m not currently travelling with Shorten, but having covered a lot of campaigns I can hazard a guess. In the respective campaign headquarters engage in a practice called opposition research – this means digging up dirt on your opponents. Both sides do it. Helpful information then tends to fall into the hands of the respective travelling press parties that can influence the questioning leaders face at their pit stops. As I said, I don’t know if that’s what happened in this instance, perhaps the picture emerged as a consequence of old fashioned journalistic leg work, but let’s say with perfect safety it’s been known to happen.
Yesterday, Shorten faced questions about the party’s candidate in the seat of Melbourne departing from Labor’s offshore processing policy. That seeded the story as a national campaign issue. Today, it was O’Toole’s turn.
Let’s look at some fundamentals here about gotcha cycles. As they say in politics, let’s go high level. It is perfectly legitimate that Shorten face questions about Labor’s stance on asylum seekers because the policy is contested internally. It’s also legitimate that Cathy O’Toole face questions about whether or not she agrees with her party’s policy, particularly if there is evidence she doesn’t agree with it.
The whole process of covering election campaigns is about testing every proposition. That’s the job of working journalists to stress test all the public offerings. The alternative is just act as a propaganda machine for the major parties. It’s also the job of journalists to drive the news cycle forward. We are in the “new” business, and news often turns on conflict. So that’s why you see this relentless pushing forward during press conferences – people aim to emerge with a new thought, a new angle, a new contradiction or inconsistency.
Once upon a time, press conferences weren’t broadcast live, all that sausage making was largely concealed from the public. Now people can watch the process around the clock if they so choose. To a certain degree journalists are damned if they do and damned if they don’t. If we nit pick, we are nit pickers. If we don’t nit pick, then people criticise us for not doing enough to test our political candidates during election cycles.
So what’s the bottom line here? I suppose it’s one person’s “gotcha” is another person’s topline for a news story.
But I completely understand the frustration that viewers face watching on at campaign press conferences. I absolutely do get it, particularly as now I don’t get out regularly myself, and I’m forced to rely on what comes back through those processes myself in order to maintain live coverage. You can, I know, look on with a certain amount of confusion, or disappointment, because inevitably there will be an issue that you want pursued that doesn’t get pursued. Completely get it.
In the broader campaign dynamic, pursuing asylum seekers today was perfectly legitimate in all sorts of ways, but I get, particularly with an issue like schools funding, voters might want to hear a bit more about that – how much does my school get, is this policy well designed so the promises come to fruition, what are the merits of needs based funding for schools versus the alternative?
It’s a highly imperfect business, journalism
But I hope this explanation provides some insight into our competing imperatives.
To stirrings elsewhere, the Institute of Public Affairs is preparing to run an aggressive public campaign against the Turnbull government’s superannuation changes.
Central to the issue is whether capping lifetime contributions to super and limiting the amount of super balances which can earn tax-free income are retrospective changes. IPA executive director, John Roskam, told Guardian Australia the government’s proposed super changes had become an “absolute firestorm” among Coalition supporters and IPA members, and the government’s claim that the changes aren’t retrospective had made people “even more angry”.
No Coalition MPs have come out against the superannuation changes (yet), although Senator Ian MacDonald has said he will raise the issue with the treasurer because he opposes retrospective legislation, but he hasn’t formed a view on whether the changes are retrospective.
To our north, colleagues are on the move.
Turnbull campaign departing Brisbane for Sydney pic.twitter.com/rJNT0ISvGU
— Heath Aston (@HeathJAston) May 10, 2016
"I mean they are everywhere!"
Just because it ticks every box, I thought I’d share an excerpt of the conversation broadcaster Alan Jones had with the immigration minister Peter Dutton earlier today. We break in to the conversation just as Jones is bemoaning the lurch to the left, Peter.
Peter Dutton:
That’s exactly right Alan and we must defeat it.
Alan Jones:
Oh yeah you have done a brilliant job. Look the Labor candidate for Bass, I mean this is every state by the way, this is the point that’s its every state, the Labor candidate for Bass in Tasmania Ross Hart said in the past that he would vote against turn backs. The Labor candidate for Cowan in Melbourne Anne Aly said ‘I support Labor’s stance to move towards a more humane and humanitarian approach.’ The Labor candidate for Higgins in Melbourne Corey Rabaut tweeted that the ‘German Neo-Nazi Party had endorsed Australia’s current refugee policy.’ You have got the former speaker Anna Burke, you have got the Freemantle MP Melissa Parke.
I mean they are everywhere!
Peter Dutton:
Well they number twelve now and there is no sense in Bill Shorten saying at his press conference again today that there is nothing to see here, everything is fine, Labor will just continue the policies of the Coalition government. He needs to come out and answer this. It’s now a leadership issue for Mr Shorten today.
Alan Jones:
Well yes it’s overtaken the campaign this.
Peter Dutton:
Well this is the issue and he needs to deal with Mr Albanese and discipline him. The interview last night on Lateline where Mr Albanese refused point blank to state that he supported the position of the Coalition in relation to turn backs where its safe to do so, in relation to Temporary Protection Visas and in relation to offshore processing. They are the three elements Alan that have given us success in stopping these boats and Anthony Albanese refused on several occasions last night to confirm that that was actually Labor’s potion and Mr Shorten needs to deal with this. This is his leadership opponent and he needs to deal with this split in the Labor party because it’s clear that if he can’t govern them in opposition then how on earth can he govern them if he was to win the election.
Alan Jones:
Yes it’s one thing to say we are in unity with the government on border protection when you have disunity within your party. Just coming to another point, but related to that. I noticed you said, just a quick one on this, there is a lot of intelligence coming out of different parts about people hoping that the election is the turning point for them and that there might be an opportunity for them after the election to restart their businesses, their people smuggling businesses. I don’t want men, and this is Peter Dutton, ‘men, women and children to go to the bottom of the ocean and I don’t want people to turn up unannounced to our country.’
So your intelligence tells you that they are on the alert and watching every move?
Peter Dutton:
Yes they are and this was reported on Channel 7 only a fortnight ago Alan. People smugglers are telling people in Indonesia that they are waiting for the outcome of the election and they think that it could be a turning point, a change of policy and that the people smugglers would be back in business. They watch every word that Shorten says, that Turnbull says, that Dutton says, that Marles’ says and if they can then they manipulate that into a message that the boats are able to restart that you will be settled in Australia. That is why we have a tough, strong and consistent line and that’s why they would be rubbing their hands together in Indonesia now at the words of Bill Shorten and Anthony Albanese. That’s why this government will not blink and we will not be dictated to by people smugglers and we are not going to allow women and children to drown at sea.
Alan Jones:
Good on you. I just want to say this to you because politicians never get any credit. There are people listening to you all over Australia at the moment and they are just simply saying that they are very grateful that Peter Dutton is there representing their interests and they feel infinitely safer as a result of that so I thank you and congratulate you and wish you well.
Peter Dutton:
Thank you Alan and all the best to you too mate.
A bit more on that WA polling that Calla Wahlquist referenced in our postcard from WA. The polling was revealed this morning by the political editor of the West Australian, Andrew Probyn.
The polling found drug-related crime, ice and jobs to be dominant issues in the [Burt] electorate. The unpopularity of the Barnett government is also dragging down the coalition vote in WA, the polling found.
The six-point swing away from the government in Burt, if reflected evenly across the State, would result in the Liberal Party losing Cowan (held by Luke Simpkins by 4.5 per cent) and possibly Hasluck (Ken Wyatt, 6 per cent).
But Liberal insiders believe the advantage of incumbency and strong local campaigns will keep Mr Simpkins and Mr Wyatt above water. Both seats were analysed by Crosby Textor in February-March.
(KM: My lovely colleague Calla Wahlquist sent me this dispatch from the hustings in Perth early this morning, and it’s only just boxed its way out of my inbox. We’ve moved on from 7am but it’s too delightful not to share.)
Here’s Calla.
Matt Keogh, Labor candidate for the newly created seat of Burt, has made an upsetting realisation. “The thing about the Canning by-election that is different to this campaign is it started cold and got warmer,” he said, as the crisp morning air at Gosnells train station turned his breath to fog. “This campaign started warm and will get colder.”
It’s 7am and Keogh and a team of red-shirted volunteers are handing out flyers.
Gosnells, 34km southeast of the Perth CBD, is just outside the old boundary of the Canning electorate, which Keogh unsuccessfully contested in the by-election in September. It’s now part of the new outer metropolitan electorate of Burt, formed out of the northern part of the Canning electorate, including part of Armadale and the suburbs of Forrestdale, Harrisdale, Piara Waters, and Kelmscott, and southern areas of Liberal-held Hasluck, like Gosnells and Thornlie.
Keogh, who moved back to his home suburb of Kelmscott to contest the Canning byelection, has remained in place and swapped out the name Canning for Burt on his campaign materials while the electorate was re-drawn around him. “This is my hood,” says the bespeckled lawyer in a pea coat.
Burt was considered to be notionally a Liberal seat, with a 6.1% margin for Liberal candidate Matt O’Sullivan, but according to The West Australian on Tuesday the Liberal Party’s own Crosby Textor polling has it on 50:50.
O’Sullivan runs mining magnate Andrew Forrest’s GenerationOne Indigenous employment scheme and had Forrest’s enthusiastic support to enter politics. But despite that high-profile backer, Labor is quietly confident it can win.
Keogh, who is expecting his first child in July with wife Annabel, has received some advice against that eventuality from his old opponent, Canning MP Andrew Hastie.
“He did give me one piece of advice, which was if I am elected, Virgin is better for taking babies than Qantas,” Keogh said. He smiled broadly when asked how he’d balance the demands of a newborn baby if voters do send him to Canberra. “There’s never been a more exciting time to be a Keogh,” he said.
Updated
While Bishop was talking, the Liberal party has issued a statement about the allocation of preferences in this campaign. This of course relates to speculation about the Liberal party preferencing Greens in Victoria. Former prime minister John Howard earlier this year publicly advised his colleagues not to go down that road. The statement from the party’s federal director says no deals, no comment.
Statement from the Liberal party on preferences, saying, we'll get back to you #ausvotes #Election2016 pic.twitter.com/rkQp0eSpAw
— Katharine Murphy (@murpharoo) May 10, 2016
The foreign minister Julie Bishop is speaking to reporters in Adelaide. She’s asked whether she would support easing restrictions around nuclear power generation in Australia in the wake of a royal commission in SA on the subject.
Bishop says sure, with several caveats.
Julie Bishop:
We would certainly want to see the business case for it. It would obviously have to be economically feasible and I believe that the Royal Commission has taken it a step further with this wide consultation and feedback and expert report. The state government is yet to say what it will do with it and of course the state government commissioned the royal commission report so we would be happy to work with the state government on a proposal that will provide economic growth and jobs in SA but it would need broad community consultation and broad community support.
The last question is on the five cent piece, which is a minor obsession of news.com political editor Mal Farr, on the basis the five cent piece actually costs six cents to produce. Bowen says he has no plans to get rid of it but if Labor wins on July 2 he’ll ask the Mint for advice.
And that’s a wrap at the NPC.
Bowen is asked will he take the money back from the Reserve Bank that the Coalition gave the Reserve Bank shortly after the 2013 election – money which significantly inflated the deficit. Bowen quips that Tony Burke’s (the shadow finance minister) eyes just lit up but no, the RBA can keep the money.
Bowen also gives a broad hint that Labor will have something to say about increasing the superannuation guarantee later in the campaign.
Q: When will you tell us?
Chris Bowen:
There’s a two month election campaign coming, just bear with us.
He’s asked about Labor’s asylum policy. Bowen, a former immigration minister, says Labor had a brawl over this at the national conference, the party has set the course, and will keep the course. He says the shadow cabinet stands behind the leader.
Chris Bowen:
My moral compass, our moral compass points us very clearly to lifting the refugee intake, inviting more refugees into Australia, in a safe and orderly process. So that we never have to go back to the situation where an immigration minister is taking the call at 2 o’clock in the morning, another boat is sinking. We cannot countenance that.
Yes the Labor party is a church full of people who are wanting to do the right thing by their fellow human beings. You’ll have people who sometimes have a different way of doing it but the shadow cabinet, the incoming cabinet, is unanimously behind Richard Marles and his determination, and Bill Shorten’s determination to ensure that the people smugglers trade does not recommence.
We went through an emotional debate at the national conference. Tony Burke gave a very fine speech at the national conference in support of what is a policy many people will regard as tough but one which is necessary to save lives.
And having been through that debate at national conference, having made that decision, we stand by it.
Updated
Bowen is asked whether he’ll submit Labor’s costing to treasury. He signals he’ll send them to the Parliamentary Budget Office. He also signals Labor would also keep the current head of the treasury, John Fraser, not sack him as the government sacked Martin Parkinson (who Malcolm Turnbull subsequently brought back as the head of his department when he took the Liberal leadership.)
Bowen is asked about keeping the deficit levy. He says Labor will keep it permanently.
Chris Bowen:
This has been the tax rate now for two years. The world hasn’t ended. Of course when fiscal circumstances allow, again, we’d review all our tax rates with a view to providing relief where we could when fiscal circumstances allow – but I’m not going to make outlandish promises about that because the budget can’t afford it, and the tax system is rightly progressive and important part of that is the top marginal tax rate.
Bowen is asked about Labor’s position opposing elements of the budget superannuation measures on the basis they are retrospective. Bernard Keane from Crikey notes these are wealthy people exploiting our retirement incomes system to avoid paying the tax that they should be paying. There’s nothing noble about what they’re doing. Why if you’re focused on fairness and fiscal discipline don’t you support these changes given the nature of what’s been going on in unsustainable retirement incomes system now for many years?
Bowen repeats what he said in the speech.
As I said, we accept that these are people of means and by and large Liberal voters but there’s an important principle here – the principle also goes to undermining confidence in superannuation for everybody.
Updated
Bowen is asked about when Labor will return to surplus. The shadow treasurer says Labor will have more to say about this later in the campaign.
He’s asked whether he’s confident that Labor can oppose many of the government’s expenditure measures, fund its own priorities, and protect Australia’s AAA credit rating. He’s asked specifically can that work over the forward estimates of the current budget. Bowen says the return to surplus needs to happen over a longer timeframe.
Chris Bowen:
The last thing the real economy needs at the moment is a massive withdrawal of fiscal activity in some rush to surplus over the next four years.
Q: I have a question about a Labor policy I found from 2010. This was where Labor went to the people at the election with a plan to reduce the company tax rate by 2% and did it with economic modelling that showed that this plan would not only increase growth but would also increase wages. Why is it that a plan that was right for then at a time of deficits and slow growth, but is not a good plan now when we have exactly the same problem? Are you being a populist by telling people what you think they want to hear rather than telling them what the economy needs – and do you acknowledge that a company tax cut can lift growth?
Chris Bowen:
That would be the company tax cut the Liberals and Nationals voted against with the Greens and blocked in the Senate. That would be the company tax cut that your referring to.
These are matters of priorities. I’ve laid out pretty clearly today our policy of ... investing in schools and hospitals. These things mean that we do have to make decisions and this tax cuts simply cannot be afforded at this time.
They are into questions now.
Peter Martin from Fairfax asks whether Labor would use its mini budget to justify breaking election promises. He correctly notes we’ve seen this trajectory before.
Chris Bowen says he won’t.
The next question is whether Labor has any plans to reinstate the debt ceiling. Bowen says no, he doesn’t.
Bowen is very much the architect of Labor’s big target strategy on policy. He says if Labor is going to return to government, it needs a mandate.
Chris Bowen:
Bill Shorten and I are as one in wanting to seek a mandate for our economic plan. Our budget repair plan, our plan for growth, and opportunity, we want the moral authority of a mandate.
It goes against the conventional wisdom to be honest about controversial plans before an election but it comes down to trust. Malcolm Turnbull talks about thrust but the fact is Labor trusts the Australian people by being upfront and honest about our plans. Malcolm Turnbull on the other hand didn’t even trust the Australian people enough to tell them the cost of the centre piece of his election budget.
Now we are on to retrospectivity in the government’s super changes. Chris Bowen says Labor opposes retrospectivity on principle: people invested in good faith and complied with the law, secondly, retrospective changes undermine confidence in superannuation and scare people away from investing in superannuation in the future.
Bowen says we will hear plenty about Labor’s first class NBN plans during this election – which is good, given all we’ve heard thus far is Bill Shorten saying Labor would build on the government’s roll-out and then subsequently suggesting Labor would do something else. I suspect the voters would like to know which version it is.
"Labor believes in inclusive growth, the Liberal model is a pretty exclusive one."
Chris Bowen:
Australia does really need, dare I say it, a plan for jobs and growth. The government says that their plan will be delivered by making cuts to families in the middle and directing a series of tax cuts for those at the top. Remember, that many of the cuts in the discredited 2014 budget remain in this one, unloved, but alive.
The growth model here is the plainest example of trickle down economics we’ve seen in a very long time. In contrast, Labor recognises that economic growth is hindered when there’s a hit to demand and when vital economic and social investments aren’t made. This was the big story of Australia getting through the global financial crisis and ... the 2014 Budget. When you attack demand you hit confidence and you reduce growth.
Labor believes in inclusive growth, the Liberal model is a pretty exclusive one.
After a section on the perils of losing Australia’s AAA credit rating, Bowen has reached the mini budget commitment now – he says he will bring forward the mid year economic forecasts to within three months of a new Labor government being sworn in.
Chris Bowen:
The impact of the prime minister’s decision to hold an election in July is that in the normal course of events, a budget in May 2017, a full ten months after the election, would be the first opportunity to have our policies impact on the fiscal and economic trajectory of the nation.
That is too long.
"The government seems to think that talking about jobs and growth delivers jobs and growth."
We flagged this morning that Bowen would work up in this speech to a commitment to a mini budget, given he’s unhappy with the forecasts in last week’s budget.
Chris Bowen:
The return to surplus under the government’s plan is built on extremely shaky foundations. In fact, I’m prepared to say none of it can be relied upon.
The forecast for nominal growth is rosy at best. The budget assumes nominal GDP growth will leap from 2.5% this year to 4. 25% next year. That’s the same leap of 1. 7% they presumed last year.
It’s at odds with the ratings agency Moody’s which predicts amore modest level. Real GDP is also assumed to just back to 3% even though the Treasury said last November that Australia’s long-term growth rate was being revised down.
The government seems to think that talking about jobs and growth delivers jobs and growth.
They seem to think that the way to produce a budget surplus is to assume one. That’s their version of the Abbott-hockey mantra. Things are better just because we’re here.
Well, I can’t rely on such presumptions for the important task of return to budget balance.
Chris Bowen at the National Press Club
Kind of amazing really that this is a budget in reply speech when we are in an election campaign. But here we are.
The shadow treasurer is on his feet.
Chris Bowen:
The mantra of jobs and growth is a slogan that could be applied to any budget, it’s so vague as to be meaningless.
(Probably best to be careful here, given jobs and growth was actually Wayne Swan’s slogan for a very long time.)
Bowen, continuing.
In fact this budget distinguishes itself by a lack of a clear objective no clear plan to get back to surplus, no clear vision for a future economy.
Just quickly – here’s a table showing the needs based school funding by electorate, courtesy of clever people in our Sydney office.
We are pushing now into Chris Bowen at the National Press Club so I’m going to reserve doing some analysis of the various events until we are on the other side of that event.
But it’s safe to note that the Labor backroom will be grinding their teeth about the trajectory of today. Today was supposed to be about electorate-by-electorate schools funding, but the campaign has been caught in a pincer movement between Greens brinkmanship, and some deft rapid response from the Coalition.
Rapid response, exhibit A.
Labor Herbert candidate Cathy O'Toole asked about her support for ALP boats policy after this appeared. @murpharoo pic.twitter.com/u9Rc8WhZbv
— Gabrielle Chan (@gabriellechan) May 10, 2016
More on that, and more besides, over the course of the afternoon.
And I’ll get to gotcha. Promise.
Chris Bowen, up in fifteen minutes.
So much excitements.
Another reporter follows Lenore’s question. What’s the direct benefit to the economy? What’s that that figure? Are you going to release the figure?
Malcolm Turnbull:
The figures in terms of the response to the economy has been identified by the treasury as being a growth in GDP by 1% overall so that is over the long-term but you see you get the growth, the response begins and it builds up. One of the reasons we have calibrated the tax cut to business in the way we have so it starts with smaller firms like the businesses we are talking to this morning, and then bills up until finally, after a decade, every company, including the largest, is paying 25% tax is that you will get an investment reaction in advance of the tax cut because firms will see that there is a tax cut coming down the track and they will say: “We can invest now and then when we make the profit we anticipate on that investment we’ll be paying tax at a lower rate.” So we have very carefully designed this company tax cut, this enterprise tax plan so, that we get the maximum outcome in terms of investment and in employment and that is what will drive it.
My colleague Lenore Taylor asks Turnbull to be clear – he’s not ruling out a preference deal with the Greens – (he isn’t), and she wants to bring him back to the Mitre 10 franchise. The owner of the business told Lenore this morning he would use the coming tax cut to either employ more people or make more profits. How does making more profits assist jobs and growth, she wants to know?
Malcolm Turnbull:
Lenore, in terms of cutting company tax, it is well understood and well accepted that if you reduce the level of business taxes, company taxes, then you will get a better return on investment, you will see more investment and you will see more employment and that is the inevitable consequence of it.
Obviously different firms will react in different ways but that is why of course Mr Bowen has previously advocated cutting company taxes ... We’ve got to compete (with comparable tax rates overseas). We back business and they will then invest and employ and that is the consequence of what they’ll do.
Turnbull is asked about the RBA note about negative gearing. He says the note is old, and Labor doesn’t have a housing affordability policy.
Malcolm Turnbull:
It is purely and simply a tax grab, another Labor tax grab.
Q: Prime minister, Labor has launched an attack on the government’s tax cuts for higher income earners. What do you make of those advertisements and are they fair given they don’t take into consideration the changes to superannuation?
Malcolm Turnbull:
Let’s be quite clear - the only cuts to personal income tax in our Budget is the increase of the $80,000 threshold to $87,000 to ensure that Australians in the middle income bracket are not going to move into the second-top tax bracket.
What Bill Shorten is proposing is to increase personal income tax. He is proposing to add another 2% after the deficit levy expires, he’s proposing to add another 2% to the top marginal rate. He’s got a commitment to higher personal income tax whereas we are reducing by that threshold change and of course you’re right, in terms of the changes to superannuation, they – 96% of people in super and Australians who are contributing to super, 96% will either be better off, particularly older Australians and women and people on low incomes, they’ll be better off and only 4% will be affected by the changes in any way that they would find adverse.
In terms of the change to the retirement phase, of course it affects around 1%, that is people with a superannuation account in retirement of over $1.6million – which is about 1%.
Same old Labor, same old deal with the Greens
First question is the prospect of a hung parliament. Will you preference the Greens Turnbull takes the opportunity to recount the events of the morning.
Malcolm Turnbull:
If you doubt Bill Shorten’s ability to keep our borders secure given the dissension in his back bench and in his own party, consider what it would be like if we have the same old Labor with the same old deal with the Greens. Remember, nobody in the Labor party did more to create the Julia Gillard prime ministership than Bill Shorten. Right now he looks as though he wants to re-enact it.
Q: Do you rule out any informal arrangements in Victoria or elsewhere with the Greens?
Malcolm Turnbull:
If you’re asking about preferences, the federal director will decide how preferences are allocated. Obviously when we know who’s nominated. That will be done in the usual way, in consultation with the organisation.
Q: There was a hung parliament. Would you rule outdoing a deal with the Greens to form government?
Malcolm Turnbull:
There is absolutely no chance – yes we can rule out any collaboration withthe Greens to form a government butI can tell you Labor won’t and Labor can’t and if they did no-one would believe them.
Malcolm Turnbull:
It’s wonderful to be here. Our national economic plan is driving jobs and growth and you can see the spirit of it here in Queensland, the confidence, the optimism, the determination to get ahead. That’s what we’re backing. We’re backing Australia. We’re backing the imaginative, the innovative, the enterprising Australians we’ve been with today because we know as we support them their businesses will grow, their enterprises will grow and they will provide more and better jobs to young Australians, Australians of all ages right across the board.
Jobs and growth, our national economic plan, Australia’s future. That’s what the choice in this election is all about.
Malcolm Turnbull addresses reporters in Brisbane
The prime minister is excited. Yes he is. Malcolm Turnbull looks pumped full of glucose jelly beans as he speaks about robots at this media conference. There has never been a more exciting time to be enthusing over robots in hospitals.
Some quick reader feedback on my Facebook forum about the Shorten media event from Kelso Kel.
Reading the interview transcript with Shorten and Cathy O’Toole, it makes me so angry and frustrated that she’s being badgered for a gotcha moment on refugee policy. It’s backing people into a corner like that which transforms a policy discussion into high-stakes take-no-prisoners extremism and which doesn’t serve anyone! I’m 100% anti the bipartisan position on asylum seekers but I don’t agree with the way (some) members of the media make a game of policy differences within parties. All that does is shut down debate, shuts down differences of opinion and it trains our electorate to focus on the gotcha instead of the issue.
This is a big subject – gotcha versus substantive discussion in election seasons. I can’t post about it now but I will return to this later, afternoon willing. It’s a topic worth walking through.
I’m pop down to the thread when I get a chance. Haven’t had an opportunity yet.
Banners in position. Check. Arrival of the prime minister. Pending.
Just for you @murpharoo some new backgrounds unveiled he in Brissie @GuardianAus #politicslive pic.twitter.com/DiMfQTnYmX
— Mikearoo (@mpbowers) May 10, 2016
A short dispatch from me on the ground in FNQ. Bill Shorten arrived at Heatley Public School in Townsville this morning with his candidate Cathy O’Toole to meet the kids and highlight Labor’s Gonski funding package. He was keen to do three things: tell the Greens to bugger off, not let in a crack of light on asylum seeker policy and talk about the importance of the regions.
The problem was a photo surfaced of O’Toole protesting outside the offices of LNP MP for Herbert, Ewen Jones, holding a sign saying “let them stay”. It was posted on Facebook and shared around by the Coalition. O’Toole’s stance would be at odds with Labor’s policy, which Shorten was keen to again enunciate this morning. “We will be compassionate in the way we treat refugees in this country but what we will never do is re allow the opening of the dangerous seaways between Java and Christmas Island.”
O’Toole was asked about her views. After some campaign counselling, she said she wanted to be very clear. “I want to be very clear, I support the Labor policy.”
Shorten moved on to the Greens and their suggestion that the party was open to another deal with Labor in the event of a hung parliament. “Tell him he’s dreaming,” said Shorten. Labor is being very emphatic about not doing a deal, after the last deal in the 43rd parliament under Julia Gillard. Shorten also managed to label the Greens “far left” in the doorstop, trying to widen the gap between the Greens and Labor. It was a point he also made on ABC Townsville this morning - that is, do not think a vote for the Greens is same as a vote for Labor.
This afternoon, there a few more stops on the Shorten express, though we are not entirely sure what they are. There are rumours of a stadium. And perhaps water. Though not boats.
Just quickly on Gonski, I’m exploring whether or not I can link you to the electorate level funding in embeddable form (here’s looking at you Nick Evershed), but for now, here are the state breakdowns Labor is promising today for needs based schools funding. This is according to the campaign materials Labor is circulating.
State Additional investment:
- SA $355 million
- VIC $815 million
- NSW $1.4 billion
- TAS $60 million
- QLD $725 million
- WA $330 million
- ACT $25 million
- NT $100 million
TOTAL $3.8 billion
Shorten was asked at the press conference about the risk of state governments withdrawing funding after the Commonwealth kicks in. The example of Queensland was cited. Shorten said everything’s different now in Queensland because there’s now a Labor government at the state level. That answer isn’t entirely satisfactory, is it?
I will pick this all apart once we are through the rush of set piece events, and also give you some detail on the Gonski announcement for today.
The prime minister is coming up shortly with a media conference in Brisbane. Stay tuned.
Meanwhile, in Melbourne, Adam Bandt: "Sometimes dreams come true"
Down in Melbourne, the Greens MP Adam Bandt is shovelling coal into the minority government fire.
Q: What did you think of Bill Shorten ruling out a Coalition with the Greens?
Adam Bandt:
I think if we end up in a parliament like we did after 2010 where no party wins then I think the Australian people would expect people in parliament to work together and to work together cooperatively and that means no-one is able to take their bat and ball and go home. It means having sensible and reasonable discussions about what - about how to deal with the fact that the Australian people have returned this particular parliament.
Bill Shorten can say that we’re dreaming, sometimes dreams come true.
And if the Australian people decide that they want a parliament where there are more than two voices who largely say the same thing then the obligation is on all of us to work together and Richard Di Natale will be speaking more about this later on today.
A few questions to round out on. Was Shorten unhappy the first debate of the campaign is in Sydney?
Bill Shorten:
I really regret that Mr Turnbull would rather stay in Sydney and debate me than come to Townsville where a lot of people legitimately have an expectation of hearing both of us.
Q: Scott Morrison has said that the RBA’s notes were prepared in 2014 regarding negative gearing. What’s your response to that?
Bill Shorten:
I think poor old Scott Morrison has blundered from one mistake to the next.
Q: Your superannuation policy is retrospective too?
Bill Shorten:
No, I think as people have examined the fine print of this budget, you know, they are quite shocked by what Mr Morrison and Mr Turnbull have proposed.
Then a full toss on Eric Abetz.
Q: On Eric Abetz, would you support, some of his Tasmanian colleagues say he should be back in Cabinet. That a good idea?
Bill Shorten:
There they are again. There’s the Liberal party arguing about the spoils of victory that they haven’t won.
On the last question in that post, about the Greens and minority parliaments – Shorten’s final locution is a bit hedged.
Bill Shorten:
Can I put it another way to Mr Bandt and the Greens – tell ‘em they’re dreaming. No deals with Labor about forming a Coalition.
No deals.
(I don’t think the questions was about coalitions – I think it was about deals to form a minority government.)
Q: On the Greens, would you be prepared to form a partnership with the Greens to form minority government?
Bill Shorten:
No, I wouldn’t.
Q: School results haven’t improved with the money allocated so why is more money the answer?
Bill Shorten:
The only people who say more money isn’t the answer are generally people who already have a lot of money.
Q: You’re proposing extra federal funding for schools but how will you ensure states like Queensland which never signed up to the last Gonski deals won’t cut their education budgets or keep it flat lining?
Bill Shorten:
There’s been a change in the government of Queensland. Campbell Newman, who was remarkably belligerent in his negotiations with us - I think that was his modus operandi – the government’s changed.
Q: What would you do if there’s a hung parliament?
Bill Shorten:
The question was what would we do in the event of a draw. Let me make it very clear. Whilst Labor is the underdog, whilst we’ve got a steep climb to win twenty seats, we’re in it to win it.
Q: The Liberals are poised to do a deal with the Greens. What do you think about that?
Bill Shorten:
There you go, the Liberal party. They say that only the Liberals can be trusted and they don’t like any of the centre parties, the centre left parties like us or extreme left-wing parties like the Greens, yet what they would do is they would do a dirty deal with the people they say are furthest from their views just to gain power. The Liberals are only backing the Greens because it’s in the Liberal party’s interest.
Shorten then shuts down further questions on this subject to the candidate. He says he was happy to have five questions, but now things need to move on.
Boats, boats, boats
The first question is about turnbacks. Can Shorten articulate Labor’s policy?
Bill Shorten:
We will support boat turnbacks where the border forces deem it appropriate. It is part of our general plan. We will, after July 2, if elected, keep the people smugglers out of business.
We will be compassionate in the way we treat refugees in this country but what we will never do is re allow the opening of the dangerous seaways between Java and Christmas Island.
Then the questions go to the candidate, Cathy O’Toole.
Q: Cathy O’Toole, can I ask if you support that? What’s your response to what should happen, should we have boat turnbacks?
Cathy O’Toole:
I want to be really clear. I 100% support theLabor policy.
Q: Can you articulate what that is?
Cathy O’Toole:
I can say to you that Labor will put money into the UNHCR to ensure that we are supporting people and not being left in camps for decades.
Q: But you don’t support boat turnbacks?
Cathy O’Toole:
I support the Labor policy which says we will not be allowing people to put their lives at risk, to be exploited and to come to this country when we can make an alternative arrangement for them.
Q: How do you reconcile that with a photo on your Facebook page campaigning outside Ewen Jones’s electorate office holding up a sign saying, “Let them stay.”?
Cathy O’Toole:
I have been a member of Amnesty International for many years. What I was saying at that point in time is very clear - I support the humane treatment of people regardless of whether they’re efugees or not. We treat people humanely. I do not support people making extreme amounts of money by extortionate measures and risking people’s lives.
Q: Is offshore processing a humane treatment?
Cathy O’Toole:
Labor’s policy is looking to put the money into the UNHCR to go back to the source, to say how do we support people to get them out of these lengthy detention camps where they are sitting for decades. I’ve met many of these people here in Townsville.
Q: Do you still want those people to come to Australia though?
Cathy O’Toole:
I think we need to - our policy is really clear, support people in a humane way, let us ensure that people are not being drowned at sea. Let us ensure that people are not being exploited and paying extortionate amounts of money that put themselves and their families at risk.
Updated
Shadow education minister Kate Ellis.
Malcolm Turnbull may want to talk about youth and jobs but let’s be very, very clear, you don’t care about youth and jobs if you don’t care about an adequately supported, quality education system. The OECD themselves have pointed out that one thing that Australia could do to boost our future economy is boost our education system and make sure that we have more graduates with the skills they need for the jobs of the future. This is about students, this is about principals and parents but this is also about Australia’s economic growth and you do not grow the economy unless you support our education system.
Labor leader Bill Shorten addresses the media in Townsville
The Labor leader has opened the batting on schools funding today. Bill Shorten tells reporters that he will be campaigning in north Queensland for several days.
Bill Shorten:
I’m spending a fair bit of my time in North Queensland to start off with because I will be a prime minister, if elected, who governs for all Australia not just the cities of Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane.
The best way you demonstrate you’re bona fides is by putting education, first, prioritising the proper funding of schools.
Is this a paint pot I see before me?
Consulting, not backpeddalling
Thanks to the ABC’s live election blog for this excerpt from Julie Bishop on Adelaide radio about superannuation.
Julie Bishop:
We’ll have a consultation period, we’ll discuss it with the public, we’ll have draft legislation, and we’ll get feedback on any unintended consequences, as one would expect.
Q: Unintended consequences and feedback is code for backpedalling?
Julie Bishop:
No it’s not.
Q: You’re now facing a backlash are you not, particularly from Liberal heartland over the retrospective nature of some of the taxes that you’ve imposed?
Julie Bishop:
It is not retrospective, it is absolutely not retrospective, it’s about the tax rate on future earnings.
Updated
ABC political reporter Naomi Woodley, who has listened to the Bishop interview, says the foreign minister also held the line on retrospectivity, which begs the question, what would the government be consulting about?
On @891adelaide Julie Bishop also insisted the super changes were not retrospective b/c they apply to future earnings. (ping @murpharoo)
— Naomi Woodley (@naomiwoodley) May 10, 2016
Meanwhile, to our north.
.@billshortenmp has arrived at Heatley State School in Townsville @abcnews #ausvotes pic.twitter.com/SgEJsRp0cJ
— Eliza Borrello (@ElizaBorrello) May 10, 2016
Is Julie Bishop repositioning on super?
The other story bubbling around this morning is the superannuation measures the government outlined in the recent budget. The hot political issue is retrospectivity – whether or not the government is imposing a new tax on existing super savings. The government has been insisting that’s not the case. This morning, on ABC News Radio, the trade minister Steve Ciobo said there was nothing retrospective about increasing a tax from zero to 15%. If that’s considered retrospective then the government could never increase any taxes because that would be retrospective.
But meanwhile, in Adelaide, an apparent departure from the holding line – which has been nothing to see here.
On @891adelaide Julie Bishop said the Govt would consult about any "unintended consequences" re superannuation changes. @abcnews
— Naomi Woodley (@naomiwoodley) May 10, 2016
Updated
While we are waiting for the campaign dam to break, I can point you in the direction of the latest in our series of campaign essays.
Today’s contribution is from David Marr. I think it’s fair to say David is underwhelmed by the spectacle. “In 2016 the government and opposition will bicker over the revenue, as they always do in election campaigns. But neither side of politics will approach the underlying problem here. Preserving Australia as a paradise for the prosperous is their joint enterprise.”
I can also remind you to sign up for Campaign Catch-Up, a summary of the day on the hustings delivered direct to your inbox. A most marvellous innovation. Get amongst it.
We are in a slight pause at the present time as the two leaders position. I think Bridie Jabour mentioned this first up but in the event you are just tuning in, the other major set piece of the day is a speech the shadow treasurer Chris Bowen will make to the National Press Club. Bowen will promise to produce a mini-budget within three months of being sworn in, telling the club the government’s budget forecasts are so unrealistic they will need updating to avoid a AAA credit downgrade.
Smile, as if this is the most natural thing in the world.
Here's a video of how crazy it is in PM Malcolm Turnbull's press pack on #ausvotes election campaign trail. pic.twitter.com/nwRUZgM2Ki
— Alice Workman (@workmanalice) May 9, 2016
Or perhaps that was the other way round. When the national media shows up, so do the candidates, little moths to flames.
Meanwhile in Townsville, the Shorten travelling party has happened upon the local Coalition member, Ewen Jones.
I see the media contingent following Malcolm Turnbull has adopted a pig that will deliver the squeak of truth whenever porkies are told. I wonder who is in charge of depressing the belly of the pig?
We have a mascot-Porky the pig of truth squeaks when a porkie is told @andrewtillett @murpharoo @GuardianAus #PMsBus pic.twitter.com/ChZNLYYFRf
— Mikearoo (@mpbowers) May 9, 2016
My colleague Lenore Taylor is vox popping the owner of Mitre 10, who in a shock development, wouldn’t mind a tax cut, either to employ another person, or “make more money.”
Ian gill owner of mitre ten Shailer Park (in Forde) explaining why we are here @murpharoo #ausvotes pic.twitter.com/gBLlAahcX6
— Lenore Taylor (@lenoretaylor) May 9, 2016
I’d say run Forrest, run (away from the Greens) but that would be wrong at a number of levels.
"He's dreaming"
Back to Townsville, Shorten is asked whether he’d be prepared to form a partnership with the Greens to form government.
Bill Shorten:
[Adam Bandt is] dreaming. Labor will fight this election to form its own government and to form a government in our own right.
Meanwhile, in BrisVegas.
This morning's excellent campaign adventure starts at mitre ten in forde #ausvotes @murpharoo pic.twitter.com/BIA3UracPv
— Lenore Taylor (@lenoretaylor) May 9, 2016
I hope Lenore will bring me back a fire pit. I really want a fire pit.
Looking up north, Bill Shorten has been on the ABC in Townsville. My colleague Gabrielle Chan is hot on his tail. I suspect she’ll send me a short dispatch so I’ll just deal with what we need to in order to bounce off the last post on boats.
Shorten is asked about Labor’s position on border protection given the leadership says one thing and candidates another thing.
Bill Shorten:
Labor and Liberal, regardless of who wins after July 2, will not reintroduce onshore processing for people who come by boat from Indonesia. The people smugglers will stay out of business.
Q: If that is the case, what’s the solution then? More money for Nauru, for facility there is?
Bill Shorten:
I think the solution ultimately is to get these people in those places resettled in third-party nations. Other places. And this government has been very slack at doing that. We’ve also said that we’ll take more refugees overall but we’re not going to have them come here in an unsafe means, ferried by criminals.
Q: Are you having those discussions already with other nations that could be those third-party places in place of Manus Island?
Bill Shorten:
Other nations will deal with the elected government of the day. It’s very hard for them to deal with an opposition. But what I do know is that we’ve spoken to experts around the world, about the best way to deal with this situation ... A Labor government will be tough on people smugglers but humane in the treatment of any person who comes within the care of the Australian government directly or indirectly.
Q: Aren’t voters right to be a little bit cynical about a party, if candidates are saying one thing and the leadership is saying something else on a matter like this?
Bill Shorten:
No, I think you will find that the general sentiment when you strip away from the gotcha moments of the media, is people want to see humane treatment. But we know in Labor and we debated our issues publicly at our national conference, so it was there for all to see.
We know that the people smugglers cannot be allowed to comeback into business with their deadly and fatal consequences and what I can assure Australians that on this occasion even more importantly the criminal gangs in Indonesia, but if Liberal Labor are elected are a July 2, you’re not back in business, full stop. We are not going to let you risk and drown people at sea so you can make an evil dollar.
On Sky News, the immigration minister Peter Dutton is doing his darndest to fan yesterday’s asylum story. Readers with me yesterday know that Labor’s candidate in the seat of Melbourne departed from the Shorten script on border protection, arguing for a more humane stance. SPLITTER shouted the campaign news cycle.
This is how elections work. The news cycle rolls greedily between small g gaffes and capital G Gaffes to help break up the policy announcements and the campaign events. Yesterday was *Shorten stunned by asylum gaffe*, at least according to the Daily Telegraph, which is also doing its best to bang the drum on the scary asylum seeker invasion issue.
Labor’s campaign spokeswoman Penny Wong follows Dutton in the Sky studios. Our policy is set, Wong says. Candidates have views but our policy is set.
Thanks to Bridie for battling the sparrows wind wall of sound – and welcome good people of Politics Live to our live coverage of the 2016 election campaign, day two. It’s delightful to be with you. As Bridie’s early reporting suggests, the early morning news cycle is, predominantly, negative gearing and that inconvenient Reserve Bank note, and the prospect of another hung parliament and a Labor-Greens government.
Let’s recap negative gearing first. A few months back, the treasurer Scott Morrison brandished some work from BIS Shrapnel which he presented as a comprehensive demolition of Labor’s negative gearing policy. Of course it was no such thing. Now, he’s the one battling an inconvenient note from the RBA which reads like an endorsement of Labor’s policy direction on negative gearing, except of course it isn’t: it’s a briefing note reflecting the bank’s long established thinking on the merits of winding back negative gearing, and the note predates Labor unveiling its policy. In politics, one thing is a constant: what goes around comes around.
Now to hung parliaments. The polls, at least the early ones, suggest the major party contest is tight. You’d also think the current batch of House cross benchers have strong prospects of re-election. The tightness of the contest has led to analysis about whether the country could be heading into another minority parliament. The Greens seem happy to fan that analysis, positioning as the dancing partner of Labor in the event the voters push the Coalition backwards at the coming poll. The government is also happy with it: it puts flesh on the bones of that Labor/Greens alliance bogey man that lurks behind every shrub on every campaign stop. Labor, which has engaged in three years of deep tissue massage to try and remove the stress of the 43rd parliament, is less keen to fan that analysis. As Labor’s deputy leader Tanya Plibersek just told Radio National: “We are playing to win. Every seat we lose to the Greens makes it more likely we’ll have Malcolm Turnbull as prime minister.”
These two issues are the drumbeat to open today. Malcolm Turnbull remains in Brisbane and will campaign there. Overnight the Labor campaign has repositioned in Townsville. Bill Shorten will campaign again on schools funding, releasing a seat-by-seat breakdown of the Gonski money.
So let’s power on. A reminder that today’s comments thread is open for your election day business. Visual maestro Magic Mike is up and about on the twits – he’s @mpbowers and I’m @murpharoo. If you speak Facebook you can join my daily forum here. And if you want a behind-the-scenes look at the day and the looming campaign, give Mike a follow on Instagram. You can find him here. Onwards into Tuesday.
Well blogans and bloganistas, our time together this morning has drawn to a close and your rightful blog driver Katharine Murphy is here to take you through the rest of the day.
Thanks for reading and see you bright-eyed and bushy-tailed tomorrow morning.
Malcolm Turnbull is wheels up to the northern Gold Coast seat of Forde and the northern Brisbane seat of Lilley – where Wayne Swan is the sitting member.
Interesting tidbit about Forde – it’s the seat former Queensland premier Peter Beattie ran in 2013. At the time it was seen as a bit of a masterstroke, but then he lost.
Greens can't pretend they're 'not making pragmatic deals that hurt people'
Straight after Adam Bandt we have Labor’s deputy leader, Tanya Plibersek talking on pretty much the same themes – potential alliances and preference deals.
We are playing to win, not playing to be part of a coalition government.
Plibersek says her seat of Sydney is “absolutely” at risk of a Liberals-Greens preference deal and the Greens have been campaigning doggedly in her seat and Anthony Albanese’s seat of Grayndler.
It makes another Liberal government more likely and I think frankly Greens voters would be disappointed.
But why shouldn’t Greens do preference deals?
Fine, they can do that, but then they can’t pretend they are not a political party like others, they want purity but of course they put their interests first going after seats like Sydney and Grayndler.
It is absolutely cynical, it is absolutely political.
They can’t pretend they are not making pragmatic deals that hurt people.
The Daily Telegraph’s front page says the Labor party is in revolt over asylum seeker policy with candidates and MPs speaking out over turnbacks. Does that type of front page hurt Labor?
I think the Daily Telegraph will be campaigning very hard for their chosen government and I’m sure there’ll be another front page tomorrow.
Plibersek says it is difficult for Labor to explain a complex policy. She says they want to bring more asylum seekers to Australia but “we don’t want them drowning at sea”.
Does she support turnbacks?
It’s something we hope we never have to do but we have to have in our policy in case it’s necessary.
Updated
Adam Bandt on Labor's 'pig headed' approach and preference deals
Greens MP for Melbourne Adam Bandt is on Radio National talking about the “stable progressive government” the Greens would be open to forming with Labor in event of a hung parliament.
[We would want to form a government] taking action on climate action, closing the gap between the rich and everyone else, we would be bringing an open mind to those discussions and trying to come up with a stable agreement.
Most of the things Greens are taking to the election, including putting decency back into treatment of people coming here seeking our help, would be on the table...we wouldn’t be going in with [demands].
I hear Labor saying ‘we either govern alone or not at all’, and I think that would be a pig headed approach.
When asked if the Greens are overstating their influence talking about potential coalitions in a hung parliament, considering they only have one seat in the lower house Bandt says the voters expect them to be upfront and explain their position.
Of course, these statements open Labor up to a scare campaign allowing the government to talk about Gillard-era Labor-Greens government.
The period of 2010 parliament was one of the most productive times ever, Tony Abbott said it was the worst thing ever and then we got Tony Abbott so I think people can make their own judgement.
Bandt says there is a view in Labor that an alliance with the Greens is “electoral poison” but the poison was Labor tearing themselves apart in the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd years.
If they want to run that scare campaign they can do it but after Tony Abbott people will think twice. People want action on climate change, people want action on refugees, people want the gap between the rich and the poor closed.
Bandt dances around questions about the supposed Greens-Liberal preference deals in some vulnerable Labor seats. He says there is no deal but does not deny negotiations.
There’s only one party preferencing Liberals in Victoria and that’s Labor.
I’m not involved in any discussion, if there are discussions it’s something the party is involved in.
Well if you have to wake up at ridiculous o’clock, for a gruelling day on the campaign, at least the view is gorgeous
Dawn, Brisbane-PM Turnbull campaigning in Brisbane today only 53 more wake ups @bkjabour @GuardianAus @murpharoo pic.twitter.com/pVn3UYqmLe
— Mikearoo (@mpbowers) May 9, 2016
Scott Morrison was asked on Radio National about potential threats to Australia’s AAA rating, which has prompted Labor to promise a mini-budget.
This is a very sensitive environment and this is why it’s important to have a national economic plan.
Multiple polls have voters feeling worse off under the government’s budget, but Morrison resorts to “national economic plan” when asked if the government needs to do more to sell it.
This is just not a budget, this is a national economic plan for jobs and growth, it is not designed before an election to throw sweetners around because this is not a time to throw sweetners around. We are showing sober economic management that is necessary to get the economy through the transition.
Scott Morrison dismisses RBA 'note' on negative gearing
The treasurer is now on Radio National’s AM. When asked if he was concerned about a Reserve Bank document which showed it believed any policy that discourages negative gearing may be good for Australia’s financial stability.
Of course not, this is a note, not an official RBA advice that was prepared in 2014, not commentary on Labor party policy.
Morrison said measures introduced by the prudential regulator rendered the 2014 recommendation irrelevant as the matters had been dealt with. He said the RBA interest rate cut was a signal of that, as Glenn Stevens was able to announce the cut without being too concerned about the housing market.
Something that would threaten our economy is a negative shock to the housing market. What the RBA said in 2014 was addressed by Apra and it worked.
Asked about Sydney house prices rising by 11% in past year Morrison said policy could not just be created for the city.
The experience is not the same across the country, I’m in Adelaide this morning and in places like Perth the experience is not the same, the sort of policies Labor is putting forward with the housing tax will slam markets across the country.
When it was pointed out the RBA document said housing prices would only be affected if winding back negative gearing was not grandfathered, which is Labor policy, Morrison said it was not a commentary on Labor policy, and then started to commentate on Labor’s policy.
[Labor’s policy] would put rents up too, where do people think the investors who own these properties will make up the losses? They will make up the losses by putting up rents.
If you want to deal with housing affordability issues you have to deal with issues where housing supply is constrained. In Sydney and Melbourne where things are stronger you can deal with supply issues and not have negative impacts on places like Adelaide and Perth.
Updated
We have the skinny on the first leaders’ debate: it will happen this Friday in the western Sydney suburb of Windsor. Malcolm Turnbull and Bill Shorten’s debate is a joint venture between Sky News and News Corp Australia.
Updated
Treasurer Scott Morrison is coming up on Radio National, in the meantime here are the Fairfax front pages today:
AFR front page. Tuesday 10 May, 2016. @FinancialReview #Election2016 #ausvotes2016 #ausvotes pic.twitter.com/hmJzaSfY4f
— Dave Earley (@earleyedition) May 9, 2016
The Age front page. Tuesday 10 May, 2016. @theage #Election2016 #ausvotes2016 #ausvotes pic.twitter.com/xxoShh7wbn
— Dave Earley (@earleyedition) May 9, 2016
The Sydney Morning Herald front page. Tuesday 10 May, 2016. @smh #Election2016 #ausvotes2016 #ausvotes pic.twitter.com/r0rptdEFtv
— Dave Earley (@earleyedition) May 9, 2016
Updated
Gabrielle Chan has set off for a jog with Bill Shorten – looks like she may be one of few women who have.
Notice that gap is widening between your correspondent and the potential PM. @billshortenmp jogs. pic.twitter.com/nmCdg95nNh
— Gabrielle Chan (@gabriellechan) May 9, 2016
The Australian has a piece today saying Shorten has shed a “heroic” amount of weight. The report also details the fitness and eating habits of the “other high-profile fat-shredder, Malcolm Turnbull”.
Mr Shorten’s metamorphosis has put him in that weird zone that most late-40s men can relate to: lose any more weight and Shorten, 49 this week, will look gaunt.
Gain any more and Peak Bill will be in danger of lurching back into the territory of Pie Shop Bill.
While Shorten is running, the Aus says Turnbull was on his rowing machine at 4.45am in Brisbane.
It may seem trivial stuff, but optics matter, and possibly even more importantly, stamina is required for this (feels like) 147 week campaign.
Progressive campaigning group GetUp have mapped what Coalition cuts to hospitals will look like over the next 10 years.
According to the group the policies amount to a $57bn cut over 10 years, equivalent to 37,000 hospital beds that can’t be funded, or 68,000 nurses or 33,000 doctors that can’t be paid, my colleague Paul Karp reports.
The map is based on work by GetUp and unions using parliamentary budget office figures to estimate each state’s share of cuts based on their health funding and activity, then estimating each hospital’s share of the cuts by the number of their beds.
The view from the Turnbull camp (with some added Snapchat pizzazz)
Morning Brisvegas! #ausvotes pic.twitter.com/yfjOFR13E9
— Alice Workman (@workmanalice) May 9, 2016
Labor MP Terri Butler says sitting MPs in Queensland are being told to run their own campaigns and not expect a visit from the leader, according to the Courier-Mail. Instead Bill Shorten will be focusing on winnable Coalition seats in the sunshine state.
Courier Mail front page. Tuesday, 10 May, 2016. @couriermail #Election2016 #ausvotes2016 #ausvotes pic.twitter.com/2FcVP6LLd3
— Dave Earley (@earleyedition) May 9, 2016
They are focusing on the non-helds...We think there is a real opportunity to pick up a lot of seats in Queensland so those of us in held seats are sort of expected, quite rightly, to make sure that we are doing everything we can to retain it.”
Butler holds the seat of Griffith in Brisbane’s inner south with a 3% margin.
Labor needs 20 seats to win government in July and pollsters reckon there are about 10 winnable seats in Queensland, so it will be crucial to a victory for either party.
Updated
Richard Di Natale has denied the report in the Herald-Sun that the Greens have done a deal with Liberals to get preferences in key vulnerable Labor seats.
He says there is still the prospect of open tickets and the Greens will not favour Liberals.
Our branches have already said they won’t be preferencing Liberals in any seats, ultimately will make decision about whether they will preference at all
Updated
Turnbull’s secret weapon in the regions...
Barnaby Joyce sent to sell ‘toff’ PM Malcolm Turnbull https://t.co/KPlNxNGk8t #auspol pic.twitter.com/Srdv1q9jun
— The Courier-Mail (@couriermail) May 9, 2016
There is a soft spot in my heart for Queensland, this is what the travelling pack with Shorten are waking up to in Townsville:
Greens may dismiss forming government with the Liberals, but when it suits them they do not mind teaming up.
Tomorrows @theheraldsun front page tonight ... Libs set to cut deal with arch enemy Greens to oust Batman #auspol pic.twitter.com/MD4e5cbpNa
— damon johnston (@damonheraldsun) May 9, 2016
The Herald-Sun is reporting the two parties are negotiating a deal where the Liberals would preference them in the Labor seats of Batman and Wills, and the Greens’ seat of Melbourne.
In return, the Greens would issue open tickets — not preferencing Labor ahead of the Liberals — in outer-suburban seats.
Updated
And we're off...
Good morning, another day dawns on the election trail with leaders (and readers) waiting with bated breath for ... well, for a stuff-up, for a policy announcement that turns everything on its head, for the killer line that sinks the other’s campaign. We’re only on day two, so feel free to breathe a bit.
I’ll be guiding you through the early hours of the morning until Katharine Murphy’s steady hand on the tiller takes charge at 8.30am.
The big picture:
This morning is all about the economy, economy, economy. As well as the hypothetical of what would happen not just if either party won the election, but if there was a hung parliament – hey, it was only a few short six years ago that it happened.
Shadow treasurer Chris Bowen is giving a speech to the National Press Club today and in it he will say Labor will deliver a mini-budget within three months of being elected because the numbers the government is using are too malleable. He even says Australia could be at risk of losing its AAA credit rating.
In an economy where confidence is low and the Reserve Bank has repeatedly expressed concerns about the lack of investment, losing one or all the AAA ratings would be a real body blow to confidence.
Bowen will also announce that a Labor government would have the Parliamentary Budget Office take control of economic forecasts in budgets so it is an “arm’s length process”.
Greens leader Richard Di Natale has been talking about the possibility of a hung parliament. He says it is “inconceivable” the Greens would negotiate with the Coalition to form government but the door would be open to Bill Shorten. The Australian is running the story as a potential return to the “Gillard-era”.
My own view is, given this government’s record on things like global warming, on their cruel treatment of refugees, on making inequality worse rather than better, that it is inconceivable we could enter into an agreement with the Coalition.
If the Labor party is interested in taking this country into a more progressive, more sustainable direction, then obviously we would be happy to have those negotiations closer to the time.
The possibility of a hung parliament loomed large on Q&A last night, where Melbourne MP Adam Bandt backed his leader and said the Greens would be open to forming a coalition government with Labor.
Labor shadow assistant treasurer Andrew Leigh, who was also on the panel, immediately tried to distance himself from that, saying he was “not inclined” to believe it was a good path to go on – of course each major party would ideally want to win in its own right.
Although, a hung parliament is no pie in the sky stuff, yesterday’s polls had the Coalition and Labor neck and neck and today’s Guardian Lonergan poll has the two major parties at 50%-50% on the two party preferred vote.
Among younger voters the reaction to the budget was quite harsh, with 61% of 18- to 24-year-olds saying it made them less likely to vote Liberal, while 30% said they were more likely to support Turnbull and 9% were unsure.
Over at the Daily Telegraph Labor members and candidates are apparently “in revolt” over asylum seeker policy and Bill Shorten’s campaign is off to a “nightmare start”. A key one? The Labor candidate in the Greens-held seat of Melbourne has “concerns about turnbacks. I don’t think they should be on the table.”
In too-weird-to-make-a-joke-about news, there may be a bust of Phillip Ruddock installed among the water fountains in a western Sydney playground, which is already named after him.
On the candidate front, dumped Liberal MP Dennis Jensen has announced that he will run as an independent and that “branch stackers should be jailed”.
To keep in the loop in the afternoon sign up here for our special election 2016 email, the Campaign catchup, a quick read on the campaign news of the day, delivered every afternoon.
On the campaign trail:
After spending yesterday blitzing marginal seats in Brisbane, Malcolm Turnbull will be on the move this morning, possibly going south. Shorten is expected to camp out in north Queensland for the next few days, he arrived in Cairns yesterday and spent the night in Townsville. He is expected to visit at least one school this morning.
The race you should be paying attention to right now:
Nick Xenophon is making both parties very nervous in South Australia, including Liberal Jamie Briggs – who you may remember resigned last year after improper conduct in a Hong Kong bar. He holds the seat of Mayo with what would usually be a very comfortable 12.5% margin.
However, the Nick Xenophon Team has identified Mayo as a key target. Xenophon polled 28.3% of the Senate vote in Mayo at the 2013 election. Briggs could be in trouble if the NXT candidate can overtake Labor and benefit from Labor and Greens preferences.
And another thing(s):
Katharine Murphy has spent countless hours and weeks (no, really, they are countless) on this stunning piece about Bill Shorten and the nature of leadership. She says it is an essay three years in the making and is the sum of her observations and meditations since Shorten became leader.
There are truly too many great quotes to pull out from it but this was one of my favourites:
Shorten claims to lead institutionally but not factionally, which in the ALP is a bit like saying you tried marijuana in your youth but didn’t inhale: preposterous, in other words.
This piece from Buzzfeed should come with a vulgar content warning, but it has been shared by so many staffers from both sides of politics in my social media feeds with the message “advancing has become a nightmare” (advancing is when staffers go to a spot where a leader will be photographed and make sure there are no signs that say “reject” or “last exit” if the leadership is being threatened. They basically look out for bad photo opportunities). An example of the extra layer of unpredictability social media and smartphones have added to the campaign.
I recorded a podcast with Kristina Keneally and my colleague Gabrielle Jackson about how to survive an eight-week election campaign. There are lots of interesting insights from Keneally about what it is like for the leader, emotionally and physically, on the trail.
Alanis Morissette ironic moment of the day:
Extraordinary. Bill Shorten goes to Cairns and fails to even acknowledge the Great Barrier Reef let alone offer any support.
— Greg Hunt (@GregHuntMP) May 9, 2016
Updated
